Rudy NYC Sports Play of the Day - 6/15/2010 (71-45 +53.36u) **5 unit play**

[QUOTE=Doc;22997]Exactly. +1. Especially when he highlights his gaudy free pick record in the subject of every post. His complete MLB season record should be known, especially when there is such a contrast. [B]MLB 266-258 -26.1 50.76%[/QUOTE][/B] Good stuff but get to the point. I see his overall record and yes it is not that good. Fair enough. Too much babbling and not enough facts. Lets the facts speak for themselves. Rudy is [B]not[/B] an overall winner.

bigrobie jumps in as I'm finishing the thread and pretty much says it. The problem is the back-and-forth bickering. NO ONE can ever stop. That's what makes message boards crap. It's the same with day-to-day email correspondence. God forbid there's a dispute, because it will go on and on. That's not gonna happen here. Rudy has a service. He doesn't promote it over-aggressively. He puts up a lot of good content. No problem with that. But when you post opinions and when you sell ANYTHING, you open yourself up to scrutiny. When that scrutiny comes, you'd better have the chops to handle it and Rudy obviously does not. I see nothing wrong with members of this board pointing out inconsistencies, or even stating their opinions on the legitimacy of any service. You want to play that game, you fade that heat. I'm going to spend my morning editing out the crap in this thread. But the crux of it -- that there are concerns about Rudy's service -- will survive. If he doesn't like it, he can go. Personally, I love Rudy's contributions here and he's been damn good, so I hope he doesn't. On the matter of breaking board rules, Rudy deserves eviction simply for his language and the tenor of his responses. But he's also being pounded on pretty hard, so a yellow card it is. But remember, the next yellow makes a red.

[QUOTE=anthony;23001]bigrobie jumps in as I'm finishing the thread and pretty much says it. The problem is the back-and-forth bickering. NO ONE can ever stop. That's what makes message boards crap. It's the same with day-to-day email correspondence. God forbid there's a dispute, because it will go on and on. That's not gonna happen here. Rudy has a service. He doesn't promote it over-aggressively. He puts up a lot of good content. No problem with that. But when you post opinions and when you sell ANYTHING, you open yourself up to scrutiny. When that scrutiny comes, you'd better have the chops to handle it and Rudy obviously does not. I see nothing wrong with members of this board pointing out inconsistencies, or even stating their opinions on the legitimacy of any service. You want to play that game, you fade that heat. I'm going to spend my morning editing out the crap in this thread. But the crux of it -- that there are concerns about Rudy's service -- will survive. If he doesn't like it, he can go. Personally, I love Rudy's contributions here and he's been damn good, so I hope he doesn't. On the matter of breaking board rules, Rudy deserves eviction simply for his language and the tenor of his responses. But he's also being pounded on pretty hard, so a yellow card it is. But remember, the next yellow makes a red.[/QUOTE] Nice thoughts Anthony and Thanks for this.

[QUOTE=anthony;23001]I love Rudy's contributions here and he's been damn good[/QUOTE] Anthony, I agree with pretty much everything you said except for what is quoted above. The quality of one's contributions should not be merely judged by wins and losses of their posted picks. Any one with a brain that has done this long enough knows that it would not be +EV to follow Rudy's picks going forward. His ability to contribute here is limited at best.

Doc, kinda. His record on the board has been good and his content has been voluminous. Those are contributions. There has been a push-back, which is allowed. Now people can make their decisions. I think it's clear who our endorsed handicappers are here -- Fezzik and Alf, as well as those that Fezzik and Alf have nodded to. Shooter is the prime example, but there are others.

[QUOTE=Doc;23005]Anthony, I agree with pretty much everything you said except for what is quoted above. The quality of one's contributions should not be merely judged by wins and losses of their posted picks. Any one with a brain that has done this long enough knows that it would not be +EV to follow Rudy's picks going forward. His ability to contribute here is limited at best.[/QUOTE] I somewhat disagree Doc. Rudy has made 524 Picks so far and that is about 7 per day. It is not agueable that he came here to promote his service and in doing so, put his best plays here. Rudy loves the action though and he just gave too many picks to his customers. His Best Picks might continue to do well and he is in line with having about 2 of those per day. Rudy does not realize it but we have done him a favor by exposing him. Maybe now he will only pick his best games for his customers and actually be "Sharp" in doing so. Only time will tell that though and I do wish him the very best of luck moving forward.

[B]Anthony, The only thing I am guilty of, other than the language and tenor issue (my apologies), is posting an accurate record of my plays[U] posted on this forum[/U] as if I was, as I put it, "another Joe" trying to share winners with others. I never advertised or solicited on behalf of my service or for financial gain. Others, not me, chose to bring up my service and other crap. What I do in my life or in business is my concern. It does amaze me that a guy can post 62% winners on a forum, mind his own business and then get abused. I will never understand the mentality of those that choose to throw stones at a person who does the work and minds his own business. I never asked anyone here to subscribe to my service and, again, the manner in which I choose to run my business is my concern. I have done everything above board and my subscribers have no issues. That is the most important thing to me. As for this statement:[/B] [I]"When that scrutiny comes, you'd better have the chops to handle it and Rudy obviously does not. I see nothing wrong with members of this board pointing out inconsistencies, or even stating their opinions on the legitimacy of any service."[/I] [B]You are so wrong, I have the chops to handle scrutiny [U]when it comes from those that should scrutinize![/U] But you are correct, I do not have the chops to handle scrutiny from a few who act like wash women. You mention inconsistencies; where are the inconsistencies? OK, I picked 62% MLB winners and posted them as "Joe" and picked 51% MLB winners as a service, a service in which a small few chose to disclose, not me! As for stating their opinions on the legitimacy of services, if that is the way you want to run this shop, so be it. But there is a distinct line that needs to be drawn between jumping into "Joe's" thread and and a thread clearly posted by a service. I post daily on four other forums and none of this nonsense goes on. As I end this response to you, I see Doc, apparently the end all when it comes to the handicapping world, believes my abilities are limited so I will refrain from posting plays here until the dust settles. Nothing but respect and my best, RUDY[/B]

Fair enough. One more thing I meant to add. Ninety-nine percent of these types of squabbles emerge when someone has lost a bet. Everyone, if you can't control your emotions when you lose, find another hobby. No more arguing on this thread.

[QUOTE=BigPappa;23008]I somewhat disagree Doc. Rudy has made 524 Picks so far and that is about 7 per day. It is not agueable that he came here to promote his service and in doing so, put his best plays here. Rudy loves the action though and he just gave too many picks to his customers. His Best Picks might continue to do well and he is in line with having about 2 of those per day. Rudy does not realize it but we have done him a favor by exposing him. Maybe now he will only pick his best games for his customers and actually be "Sharp" in doing so. Only time will tell that though and I do wish him the very best of luck moving forward.[/QUOTE] You are suggesting that his free picks were or are in fact his best plays? Surprisingly, I have not yet heard the same assertion from Rudy. It would make for an interesting debate. His non-free (assuming they were less than his best plays) record is still a reflection of his handicapping ability. If he truly had an edge, you would expect even his less than best plays over a 500+ game sample size to be at least around break even against stale reduced juice lines, not -75 units.

[QUOTE=RudyNYCSports;23009][B]Anthony, The only thing I am guilty of, other than the language and tenor issue (my apologies), is posting an accurate record of my plays[U] posted on this forum[/U] as if I was, as I put it, "another Joe" trying to share winners with others. I never advertised or solicited on behalf of my service or for financial gain. Others, not me, chose to bring up my service and other crap. What I do in my life or in business is my concern. It does amaze me that a guy can post 62% winners on a forum, mind his own business and then get abused. I will never understand the mentality of those that choose to throw stones at a person who does the work and minds his own business. I never asked anyone here to subscribe to my service and, again, the manner in which I choose to run my business is my concern. I have done everything above board and my subscribers have no issues. That is the most important thing to me. As for this statement:[/B] [I]"When that scrutiny comes, you'd better have the chops to handle it and Rudy obviously does not. I see nothing wrong with members of this board pointing out inconsistencies, or even stating their opinions on the legitimacy of any service."[/I] [B]You are so wrong, I have the chops to handle scrutiny [U]when it comes from those that should scrutinize![/U] But you are correct, I do not have the chops to handle scrutiny from a few who act like wash women. You mention inconsistencies; where are the inconsistencies? OK, I picked 62% MLB winners and posted them as "Joe" and picked 51% MLB winners as a service, a service in which a small few chose to disclose, not me! As for stating their opinions on the legitimacy of services, if that is the way you want to run this shop, so be it. But there is a distinct line that needs to be drawn between jumping into "Joe's" thread and and a thread clearly posted by a service. I post daily on four other forums and none of this nonsense goes on. As I end this response to you, I see Doc, apparently the end all when it comes to the handicapping world, believes my abilities are limited so I will refrain from posting plays here until the dust settles. Nothing but respect and my best, RUDY[/B][/QUOTE] I will be quick. Your username is exactly the same as the URL of your website. You post 99.9% of the time in your own thread. This is not what "Joe's" do. Your posted record here only represents a small percentage of your baseball plays this season, therefore is misleading. You sell picks for money so you shouldn't be allowed to mislead. You cannot handle scrutiny regardless of where it comes from.